IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/joepsy/v31y2010i5p818-831.html

How genes make up your mind: Individual biological differences and value-based decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Ramsøy, Thomas Z.
  • Skov, Martin

Abstract

Neuroeconomics is the multidisciplinary study of value-based decision-making. One of the core topics is how emotions affect decision-making. Developments in economic models of decision-making have been influenced by technological innovations and empirical findings in cognitive neuroscience. Now, a recent approach in cognitive neuroscience, often referred to as "imaging genetics", promises to make significant contributions to our understanding of both behavioral and neural aspects of value-based decision-making. Recent work has demonstrated the role of neurotransmitter alterations in clinical states such as Parkinson's disease, depression and anxiety, and how this may affect decision behavior. However, these insights are limited through their focus on extreme neuropathology, which sheds little light on similar functions in healthy individuals. Here, we present and discuss studies of the role of drug-induced and genetically driven changes in neurotransmitter levels, and their effects on value-based decision-making. Following this, we argue that in healthy subjects, individual variance in decision behavior can be explained by such genetic factors, and gene-environment interactions. We suggest that this development should be used in neuroeconomic research in order to both improve behavioral models, by stressing the biological nature of individual variance, and through the improvement of our general understanding of the brain basis of value-based decision-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Ramsøy, Thomas Z. & Skov, Martin, 2010. "How genes make up your mind: Individual biological differences and value-based decisions," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 818-831, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:31:y:2010:i:5:p:818-831
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167-4870(10)00026-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Zak, Paul J. & Fakhar, Ahlam, 2006. "Neuroactive hormones and interpersonal trust: International evidence," Economics & Human Biology, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 412-429, December.
    2. Daniel Kahneman & Peter P. Wakker & Rakesh Sarin, 1997. "Back to Bentham? Explorations of Experienced Utility," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 375-406.
    3. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Bechara, Antoine & Damasio, Antonio R., 2005. "The somatic marker hypothesis: A neural theory of economic decision," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 336-372, August.
    5. Camelia Kuhnen & Brian Knutson, 2005. "The Neural Basis of Financial Risk Taking," Experimental 0509001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Witt, Ulrich & Binder, Martin, 2013. "Disentangling motivational and experiential aspects of “utility” – A neuroeconomics perspective," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 27-40.
    2. Solnais, Céline & Andreu-Perez, Javier & Sánchez-Fernández, Juan & Andréu-Abela, Jaime, 2013. "The contribution of neuroscience to consumer research: A conceptual framework and empirical review," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 68-81.
    3. Lim, Weng Marc, 2018. "Demystifying neuromarketing," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 205-220.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Klaus Wälde & Agnes Moors, 2016. "Current Emotion Research in Economics," Working Papers 1612, Gutenberg School of Management and Economics, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz.
    2. Klaus Wälde, 2016. "Emotion Research in Economics," CESifo Working Paper Series 5982, CESifo.
    3. Daniel Serra, 2021. "Decision-making: from neuroscience to neuroeconomics—an overview," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 91(1), pages 1-80, July.
    4. Brice Corgnet & Camille Cornand & Nobuyuki Hanaki, 2020. "Negative Tail Events, Emotions & Risk Taking," Working Papers 2016, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    5. Brice Corgnet & Camille Cornand & Nobuyuki Hanaki, 2020. "Tail events, emotions and risk taking," Working Papers halshs-02613344, HAL.
    6. Francesco GUALA, 2017. "Preferences: Neither Behavioural nor Mental," Departmental Working Papers 2017-05, Department of Economics, Management and Quantitative Methods at Università degli Studi di Milano.
    7. Jackson Barngetuny (PhD), 2025. "Behavioral Biases and Real Estate Bubble Formation in Kenya: A Behavioral Finance and Neuroeconomic Perspective," International Journal of Finance and Accounting, IPRJB, vol. 10(4), pages 54-79.
    8. Carter, Steven & McBride, Michael, 2013. "Experienced utility versus decision utility: Putting the ‘S’ in satisfaction," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 13-23.
    9. Cheng, Zhiming & Smyth, Russell & Zhang, Le, 2024. "Does childhood adversity affect household portfolio decisions? Evidence from the Chinese Great Famine," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    10. Elie Matta & Jean McGuire, 2008. "Too Risky to Hold? The Effect of Downside Risk, Accumulated Equity Wealth, and Firm Performance on CEO Equity Reduction," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4), pages 567-580, August.
    11. Che-Yuan Liang, 2017. "Optimal inequality behind the veil of ignorance," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(3), pages 431-455, October.
    12. Hajdu, Tamás & Hajdu, Gábor, 2011. "A hasznosság és a relatív jövedelem kapcsolatának vizsgálata magyar adatok segítségével [Examining the relation of utility and relative income using Hungarian data]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 56-73.
    13. Manel Baucells & Silvia Bellezza, 2017. "Temporal Profiles of Instant Utility During Anticipation, Event, and Recall," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(3), pages 729-748, March.
    14. Chen Ying & Härdle Wolfgang K. & He Qiang & Majer Piotr, 2018. "Risk related brain regions detection and individual risk classification with 3D image FPCA," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 35(3-4), pages 89-110, July.
    15. Ingebjørg Kristoffersen, 2010. "The Metrics of Subjective Wellbeing: Cardinality, Neutrality and Additivity," The Economic Record, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 86(272), pages 98-123, March.
    16. Daniel Serra, 2019. "La neuroéconomie en question : débats et controverses," CEE-M Working Papers halshs-02160911, CEE-M, Universtiy of Montpellier, CNRS, INRA, Montpellier SupAgro.
    17. Cary Frydman & Nicholas Barberis & Colin Camerer & Peter Bossaerts & Antonio Rangel, 2014. "Using Neural Data to Test a Theory of Investor Behavior: An Application to Realization Utility," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 69(2), pages 907-946, April.
    18. Yoshiro Tsutsui & Iku Tsutsui-Kimura, 2022. "How does risk preference change under the stress of COVID-19? Evidence from Japan," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 64(2), pages 191-212, April.
    19. Nick Netzer, 2009. "Evolution of Time Preferences and Attitudes toward Risk," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(3), pages 937-955, June.
    20. Jan-Emmanuel De Neve & George Ward & Femke De Keulenaer & Bert Van Landeghem & Georgios Kavetsos & Michael I. Norton, 2018. "The Asymmetric Experience of Positive and Negative Economic Growth: Global Evidence Using Subjective Well-Being Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 100(2), pages 362-375, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:joepsy:v:31:y:2010:i:5:p:818-831. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/joep .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.